Engaging with Net Neutrality
photos by NAMAC Staff
In the wake of Google-Verizon’s joint policy proposal, people are taking the battle for net neutrality to the streets in a way I haven’t seen before.
Last Thursday, 750 people crowded inside a high school in Minneapolis, delivering impassioned pleas to FCC Commissioners Mignon Clyburn and Michael J. Copps about the importance of open Internet. Several advocacy groups such as Free Press, the Center for Media Justice and the Main Street Project were among the people there. Over a 1000 viewers tuned into the event online via a live stream provided by the Minnesota citizen journalist project The Uptake.
In addition to people speaking out against the proposal in a public forum, there was also a protest outside of Google Headquarters in Mountain View, California. Just four days after Google-Verizon released their proposal for broadband regulation, Freepress, along with MoveOn.org and Color of Change brought together a little under 100 people during the middle of the day on a Friday, to deliver petitions with 300,000 signatures protesting the Company’s legislative proposal.
With less than 24 hours notice, everyone from artists, to technology geeks to Raging Grannies, assembled outside Google’s main entrance, prepared with songs, cameras and “Don’t Be Evil” banners.
James Rucker, the head of Color of Change, spoke of the Internet as a valuable resource for communities:
“As someone who’s trying to organize the community politically, the platform that the Internet affords is precious, it’s been preserved thus far. We want to all stand together and say it needs to be preserved from here on out. We expect Google to be on the front lines of making that happen, not on undoing it.”
Google allowed a small group of protestors to enter its building to deliver the petitions. The company encouraged people to submit criticism to Google’s Public Policy Blog.
The Google protest was over in an hour. No one got arrested.
Small Event, Big Story
The small demonstration outside of Google Headquarters received considerable local and international press coverage. The story was covered by the BBC, The New York Times, and technology publications such as Wired, Ars Technica and CNET. The Daily Show even did a segment on it.
Yolanda Hippensteele, an organizer for the rally on behalf of the Save the Internet Coalition said, "The rally was successful in creating a visceral demonstration to Google that there is real public outcry regarding their abandonment on net neutrality[...]It provided a story through which more people could learn about this critical issue.”
Every Issue Needs a Story
The battle for net neutrality didn’t begin with a protest outside of Google headquarters. The history of net neutrality – the principle that all content, sites and platforms should be equally accessible to all Internet users – is something that many people don’t understand because it deals with complex technological language as well as a dense legal history. Basically, net neutrality is a policy objective that is part of the FCC’s regulatory agenda for broadband. Over the years, there has been a lot of debate within the FCC over how to regulate broadband to preserve net neutrality. The Open Video Alliance gives a good overview of the issue.
Google and Verizon’s proposal comes after the FCC ended closed door talks with Internet companies and service providers regarding future directions for broadband regulation.
Under the Google-Verizon proposal, net neutrality would not apply to wireless services and “differentiated” wired services. Critics say this would allow for a two tiered Internet system – one where users would have to pay for premium content and functionalities.
The images and video of people holding “Don’t Be Evil” signs resonated with me in a way that simply reading about the story might not have. The narrative of Google betraying its mission to support net neutrality, is a powerful one. Without Google as an ally, people may start to realize that they need to fight for their own interests. With Grannies getting out there and waving signs, we start to see net neutrality, not as an abstract “policy objective” but as a basic democratic right.
Whatever the result of the Google-Verizon joint policy proposal turns out to be, the story of the Google protest got me thinking: What would a two-tiered Internet look like? I watch a lot of videos – and some video content, it’s realistic to say, is most likely to be bracketed off in a premium services category.
Let’s say I want to watch Elisa Kreisinger’s remix video art on YouTube. Except for some reason in this imaginable future, this video is taking forever to load. As it turns out, I can easily watch the video on this new video sharing site, only I have to pay for it.
In a world where ISPs are deciding the quality and type of online services I can use, I may not be able to watch the videos I want. What is more though, is that independent video artists may not be able to afford paying the toll to be on the premium tier. Video artists' ability to create art would also be negatively affected by a tiered-Internet. Kreisinger’s work is reliant on the availability of copyrighted materials. If those copyrighted materials are guarded on this higher tier Internet, transformative video art may fall to the wayside.
As someone who works for an arts organization, I see net neutrality as an arts advocacy issue. In January of this year, NAMAC showed its support for net neutrality in an FCC notice regarding the preservation of the Open Internet.
We don’t have to think Google is evil, but we should be doing our best to explain net neutrality in simple terms. Through video, images, documentaries, and music, we can inspire people, as well as policy makers, by giving this issue a human face.
--
Rachel Allen
Online Community Manager
NAMAC
